ASUS today announced the PA249Q ProArt Series LCD Monitor, a professional 24-inch display that is factory pre-calibrated for uncompromised color precision, straight from the box. The PA249Q ProArt Series LCD Monitor has a native 1920 x 1200 resolution with 16:10 aspect ratio and features AH-IPS (Advanced High-Performance In-Plane Switching) display technology for a bright and vibrant image with 178-degree wide viewing angles. The PA249Q also features ASUS Smart Contrast Ratio, and ASUS QuickFit Virtual Scale and Splendid Video Intelligence technologies for enhanced image quality.

1920x1200 is not a big deal, many 24" (such as Dell U2412M) are at this resolution considering most 23" are 1080p, and this is just slightly taller.

currently PA249Q is selling for 4900 RMB in China, which is around $790 USD
although for comparison's sake PA248Q is selling for 2800 RMB ($450 USD) in China, So im just wondering, what justifies the double in price for essentially identical specs.

I would be a bit disappointed if they announce a successor to the PB278Q I just bought, but if the only difference is going to be pre-calibration of the colours then I will not be bothered at all. I'm loving the quality of the PB278Q so far. There is almost no noticeable backlight bleed on a black background at all and I love the extra inputs over my old Dell 2407. Gaming on it is a joy too. I just wish the menu system was more intuitively designed as it is pretty awkward to navigate. How hard is it to come up with a simple and fluid method of changing basic settings? You'd think electronics companies in general always give this job to the janitor...

PA248Q is weak monitor. This is the successor of the 246Q which is using very nice panel (10bit P-IPS). 28Q is cheap e-IPS. I hope the 29Q is also using WCG-CCFL instead of cheap and weak LED ... if it's not 26Q still will be the BEST from this series. Also I didn't like that they removed the card reader from 29Q...

I like the mix of performance and price of the ProArt series but something in me tells me that i would hate that gimmicky scale indented on the border of the screen.

My impression is that when the display would be on the light reflected form that border, being so uneven, would "attract" the sight on that border. And i also imagine that a lot of dust could stick to those ridges.

I look now at my Samsung displays' chamfered border and the light reflects in an even non distracting way.

I guess what display manufacturers should do is take the diameter of the focused field of view of the average eye, centered on the screens' border, at the normal ergonomic distance and make everything in that circle as non distracting as possible. Or in other words make a straight, plain, non glossy border, without crazy colors, LEDs and logos. At least for semi-pro displays and up.

Does this make any sense? It's 6:20 AM and i don't know if i can make myself understood at this hour.

P.S. no personal experience with this series of displays, only impressions and imagination

1920x1200 is not a big deal, many 24" (such as Dell U2412M) are at this resolution considering most 23" are 1080p, and this is just slightly taller.

currently PA249Q is selling for 4900 RMB in China, which is around $790 USD
although for comparison's sake PA248Q is selling for 2800 RMB ($450 USD) in China, So im just wondering, what justifies the double in price for essentially identical specs.

You need to realise that this ASUS 16:10 monitor and the Dell equivalents are not aimed at the general consumer. They are professional grade monitors. They offer much greater coverage of RGB colour space and superior viewing angles at the expense of response times available on cheaper TN panels. However the response time gap has been narrowing of late. It would be possible to create 1200P budget monitors for around $200 but manufacturers don't do this because 1080P is the industry standard for entertainment media. Movies, games, youtube and all of that. That is what your average consumer is happy with. Professionals who actually use their screens for productivity purposes realise that 16:10 is a more useful aspect ratio when working in various software packages. Therefore 16:10 panels are a niche product that are not going to be mass produced on cheaper components and sold at wal mart any time soon, if ever. If you care to take a look around then you will see that it is perfectly possible to spend a lot of money and pay a premium price for certain 16:9 screens aimed at the "premium consumer" market. So don't confuse the relative higher prices of 1200P screens with being some kind of tax for a little extra vertical space. They are mostly offered as professional grade products and that is why they cost more.

You need to realise that this ASUS 16:10 monitor and the Dell equivalents are not aimed at the general consumer. They are professional grade monitors. They offer much greater coverage of RGB colour space and superior viewing angles at the expense of response times available on cheaper TN panels. However the response time gap has been narrowing of late. It would be possible to create 1200P budget monitors for around $200 but manufacturers don't do this because 1080P is the industry standard for entertainment media. Movies, games, youtube and all of that. That is what your average consumer is happy with. Professionals who actually use their screens for productivity purposes realise that 16:10 is a more useful aspect ratio when working in various software packages. Therefore 16:10 panels are a niche product that are not going to be mass produced on cheaper components and sold at wal mart any time soon, if ever. If you care to take a look around then you will see that it is perfectly possible to spend a lot of money and pay a premium price for certain 16:9 screens aimed at the "premium consumer" market. So don't confuse the relative higher prices of 1200P screens with being some kind of tax for a little extra vertical space. They are mostly offered as professional grade products and that is why they cost more.

I think you miss the point of simply getting a 2560x1440 monitor for less instead. Which of course, shows even more than the x1200. And it's not some bargain basement panel, they're high end LG IPS panels. The same ones you'll find in Apple's hilariously overpriced "cinema" displays.

I didn't miss any point. You are talking about something else now. Yes there is some value to be had from 2560x1440 panels like Catleap. You would still be getting a shorter warranty or lower quality control despite being the same panel. They would make up for the cheaper price somehow. Granted it would not explain the full price difference.

So long as they have tightened up their quality control when it comes to their monitors, I'll definitely be grabbing one of these! The PA246Q was a phenomenal monitor, best in its price range and when calibrated it was more accurate than the U2410 I had sitting next to it, but being the first of its kind from Asus it had teething problems... Nothing major, just annoyances.

The PB248/278-series, however, had a lot more problems and after 3 tries with 3 different PB278Q 2560x1440p PLS panel Monitors, I just switched it for a Dell U2713H instead. I like PLS Panels, but right now unless you go with the Samsung S27A950 WQHD display, which is ~$1k, or you get really lucky with some of the newer Korean "IPS" panels which are actually "overclockable" PLS panels, you're not going to get your hands on one easily...

As much as I love having the 1440p and 1600p (U2713H 1440p 27" IPS and U3014 30" AH-IPS with BG-LED Backlighting for actual 1.07bil colors via 10bit panel/14bit-LUT) monitors for anything from work to gaming, I am wanting to give Surround a shot and do it "my way"... Which is a 30" 1600p panel in the middle in landscape and then on either side a smaller 16:10 panel in portrait. I have already tried with 1680x1050, and some 4:3 1600x1200, but I want to get it set up "perfectly" and I haven't found that yet....
The reason I mention this is because for multi-Monitor gaming, IPS and PLS are PERFECT since there is zero distortion at the angles you're viewing from, while with the TN panels I've used there is ALWAYS color/gamma shift.

I really want to try a new and improved A-MVA/cPVA panel, though... They are my absolute favorite for non-color-critical work, as their blacks are like ink and their whites are brilliant, with contrast ratios that are sky-high... The prior iterations just haven't been able to rid themselves of their "ghost"(ing issue).